Bowman System

Lord Astor of Hever: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether, following operational experience of the Bowman system at battalion level, it is intended to seek further operational experience at brigade and divisional level before the system is adopted as fully proven; and
	What adjustments or alterations need to be made to the Bowman system and equipment as a result of initial operational experience.
	 Question number missing in Hansard, possibly truncated question.

Lord Bach: We declared Bowman to be in service on 26 March 2004. At the in-service date, as planned, Bowman was capable of supporting two mechanised battalions in non-warfighting operations. It delivered high quality, secure voice communications down to half-section level including the vehicles that would be deployed in such operations.
	We have always planned for Bowman, like other complex programmes, to be developed and delivered incrementally from in-service date. Therefore, work is continuing on conversion of, for example, armoured fighting vehicles, ships and helicopters, and on a comprehensive and progressive test and trials programme, ranging from laboratory integration and analysis to operational field trials. A further brigade-level field trial is due to be held before the end of the year. The aim of all this work is to achieve the full functionality of Bowman including data messaging, situational awareness capability and assurance of the system's robustness and usability. Together with parallel work to develop the non-equipment elements of military capability, we plan to achieve full warfighting capability in stages across different operational environments—land based, amphibious and air assault—over the next two years or so.
	We intend that the first deployment of Bowman for non-warfighting operations will take place at brigade level next year. We will continue to use experience from this deployment to inform the continuing programme to deliver the full Bowman capability.

Bowman System

Lord Astor of Hever: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What steps they are taking to gain further practical experience of the Marconi Selina H4855 personal role radio in operational conditions.
	 Question number missing in Hansard, possibly truncated question.

Lord Bach: The smart acquisition of the Bowman personal role radio is a successful story. It was formally accepted into service in January 2002, two months earlier than forecast and within planned cost. It has been and continues to be used extensively in a variety of worldwide operational theatres including Afghanistan and Iraq, and feedback indicates that its performance has exceeded expectations.

Joint Strike Fighter

Lord Astor of Hever: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What are the remaining weight issues with the Joint Strike Fighter.
	 Question number missing in Hansard, possibly truncated question.

Lord Bach: Weight issues are being addressed across the aircraft system as a whole. Design changes to drive out the excess weight of the STOVL variant have been identified by the Joint Strike Fighter prime contractor and reviewed by the US Department of Defense. We are now in the process of considering the changes, against the background of our key user requirements.

Joint Strike Fighter

Lord Astor of Hever: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether the memorandum of understanding signed by the Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean, the then Defence Procurement Minister, committing the Government, as a level one participant, to invest £1.3 billion and a further £600 million towards specific British requirements, secured access to the software codes for the avionics on the Joint Strike Fighter; and, if not, whether such access was sought and refused.
	 Question number missing in Hansard, possibly truncated question.

Lord Bach: It was recognised at the time of signature of the memorandum of understanding (MoU) for the system demonstration and development phase of the Joint Strike Fighter programme that access to technology would be required but that this would need to be secured incrementally as the programme progressed and specific information needs were identified. The MoU is supplemented by an exchange of letters between the UK and US Defence Secretaries, which, inter alia, identify the principle of data sharing.
	In line with this approach, access to such avionics software required at this stage to enable both the MoD and UK companies to participate as key partners in the design and development of the aircraft has been achieved.
	Further technology access to meet the full exchange of letters requirements in the future is also being progressed jointly with UK industry and in close consultation with the Joint Strike Fighter project office. We will continue to work closely with the US to gain assurances that the technology required will be available to the UK when needed.

Defence Procurement

Lord Harrison: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What further steps they are taking to establish a fully open market for defence within the single European market, comparable to that found in Britain, reserving only the separate areas of nuclear, cryptography and intelligence systems.
	 Question number missing in Hansard, possibly truncated question.

Lord Bach: The Government believe that there is a clear need to improve European defence capabilities. Improving the transparency and openness of defence procurement across Europe will be an important step towards this by providing greater access to European defence markets. The European Commission's Green Paper on defence procurement, published on 23 September 2004, and the creation of the European Defence Agency, provides an opportunity to discuss these issues in more depth.
	As part of this debate, the Government have their own ideas on how a more open and transparent defence equipment market in Europe might be established. Our proposals were submitted to Parliament as part of our Explanatory Memorandum on the Commission's Green Paper on 28 October 2004, and centre on the use of a voluntary code of conduct covering a wide range of defence procurement. We are currently canvassing views on our proposals with other EU member states.

Sonar 2087

Baroness Miller of Chilthorne Domer: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Bach on 21 October (WA 92–93), how the Ministry of Defence will assess when an effect on marine life is detrimental; what proof would be required and by whom such proof would be obtained; and whether evidence from academic institutions would be admissible.
	 Question number missing in Hansard, possibly truncated question.

Lord Bach: The Ministry of Defence assessment of the effect of Sonar 2087 on marine mammals uses national and international peer reviewed and accepted data on the effects of acoustic noise. In compliance with the United Kingdom Habitats Regulation, the MoD continues to assess the likely impact of Sonar 2087 on the marine environment. In support of this the MoD liaises with, and receives advice from, the statutory nature conservation bodies.
	Both academic and independent marine mammal specialists support the MoD in obtaining evidence to assess whether Sonar 2087 has caused a detrimental effect on marine life.
	The use of Sonar 2087 has been regulated during its development and manufacture phase in accordance with the recommendations of the global environmental impact assessment which was compiled by QinetiQ and peer reviewed by recognised academic experts. In continuing to provide the MoD with scientific advice QinetiQ reviews relevant published academic, scientific papers and research, and legal policy.

Military Training: Privately Owned Land

Lord Astor of Hever: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Bach on 1 November (WA 7), whether the figures relating to landowners include tenant farmers, or whether this is an additional figure.
	 Question number missing in Hansard, possibly truncated question.

Lord Bach: We do not differentiate between landowners and tenant farmers in the context of training on private land. The figures provided in my previous Answer therefore include tenant farmers.

Military Training: Privately Owned Land

Lord Astor of Hever: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Bach on 1 November (WA 7), when is the predicted timescale for the impact of the loss of opportunities for military training on private land to be decided.
	 Question number missing in Hansard, possibly truncated question.

Lord Bach: The impact of landowners' and farmers' withdrawal of permission to train on private land can only be fully assessed when the scale of such decisions is known. This is, of course, entirely a matter for individual landowners and farmers. In the mean time, we remain extremely grateful for the assistance landowners and farmers give to allow the Army the opportunity to train on private land.

Military Training: Privately Owned Land

Lord Astor of Hever: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What proportion of Ministry of Defence land would be rendered unusable without (a) contiguous private land being available; and (b) access rights across private land.
	 Question number missing in Hansard, possibly truncated question.

Lord Bach: No Ministry of Defence training land would be rendered completely unusable.

Playing Fields

Lord Moynihan: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether local audits, as required by planning policy guidance note 17, will be undertaken by the Ministry of Defence before the sale of any of their playing fields as part of the Ministry of Defence's programme to sell surplus land.
	 Question number missing in Hansard, possibly truncated question.

Lord Bach: Planning policy guidance note 17 places an obligation on local authorities and not the Ministry of Defence to carry out local audits of open space, sports and recreational facilities in order to develop appropriate policies within the local planning framework.
	Nevertheless, the Ministry of Defence will consult local authorities prior to marketing surplus land and property in order to establish the planning framework for a particular site, which may involve an independent assessment of such matters.

Apache Attack Helicopter

Lord Astor of Hever: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they are satisfied with the progress of the Apache AH1 attack helicopter in the recent exercise Eagles Eye 2004.
	 Question number missing in Hansard, possibly truncated question.

Lord Bach: One of the main objectives of Exercise Eagles Eye 2004 was to validate the initial operating capability of the Apache attack helicopter, and this was achieved very successfully.

Local Government Finance

Lord Greaves: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will allow local authorities in England, which are not receiving the full amount of revenue support grant implied by the new needs-based formula allocation system as a result of "ceilings" in grant payments made under the transitional regime, to levy additional council tax without being capped, in order that they can spend closer to, or at the level that is implied by, the new formula.
	 Question number missing in Hansard, possibly truncated question.

Lord Rooker: It is premature to speculate about the level of government funding that will be available to local authorities in 2005–06, as the proposals for the provisional local government settlement for 2005–06 have not yet been announced.
	No decisions on capping in 2005–06 and beyond have been made. But the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister has made it clear that we expect to see significantly lower council tax increases next year and will take even tougher capping action in 2005–06 if that proves necessary.

Gypsy and Traveller Encampments

Lord Dixon-Smith: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether the judgment in the Court of Appeal in the case of First Secretary of State and Others v Chichester District Council has implications for present planning guidance in relation to the provision of sites for Gypsy caravans.
	 Question number missing in Hansard, possibly truncated question.

Lord Rooker: This judgment does not change present planning guidance. The case does however send a clear message that local authorities, in line with existing guidance, should seek to ensure adequate provision of Gypsy sites through the development plan process.

Gypsy and Traveller Encampments

Lord Dixon-Smith: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many local authorities might be vulnerable to the establishment of Gypsy encampments without planning permission as a consequence of the local authorities not having sufficient established sites with planning permission within their boundaries and the local authorities subsequently taking no action to provide additional sites.
	 Question number missing in Hansard, possibly truncated question.

Lord Rooker: It is not possible to estimate how many unauthorised Gypsy site developments might result from local authorities not taking the advice given in Circular 1/94 "Gypsy Sites and Planning". This states that they should identify suitable locations in their development plans wherever possible and failing that, they should have realistic criteria for suitable locations as a basis for their site provision policies.

Gypsy and Traveller Encampments

Lord Dixon-Smith: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How a local authority is to differentiate between the need to protect the countryside and the need to provide sites for Gypsy caravans in order to avoid breaching Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
	 Question number missing in Hansard, possibly truncated question.

Lord Rooker: Local authorities determine planning applications in accordance with their development plan and other material considerations. Development plans must reflect government policy aimed at protecting the countryside, including the green belt. Local authorities have to decide whether there are circumstances to justify development in such areas. In doing so, they must also take account of the human rights of applicants. Each case is decided on its own merits.

Children's Health

Lord Pendry: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will ensure that ring-fencing will be provided for children's health within the National Health Service budget.
	 Question number missing in Hansard, possibly truncated question.

Lord Warner: Children's health is an important priority for this Government. This is why we published the National Service Framework (NSF) on Children, Young People and Maternity Services on 15 September 2004 and have ensured that the Department of Health's public service agreement from the 2004 spending review contains targets on childhood obesity, child and adolescent mental health services, infant mortality and the under-18 conception rate. Implementation of the NSF is mandatory during its 10-year span.
	However, we believe that funding should be allocated to the National Health Service with the absolute minimum of earmarking for specific services. This allows the NHS locally to make the right decisions on how to address local priorities while meeting national standards and targets.

Integrated Children's System Database

The Earl of Northesk: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Why no provision has been made for the roll-out of the integrated children's system database in the Children Bill; and
	Given the provision in Clause 9 of the Children Bill, what additional purposes are intended to be serviced by the integrated children's system database.
	 Question number missing in Hansard, possibly truncated question.

Lord Filkin: The integrated children's system (ICS) will be quite different from the information database(s). The ICS is a framework for councils with social services responsibilities' (CSSRs') work with children in need and their families that provides a single approach for assessment, planning, intervention and reviewing based on an understanding of children's development needs in the context of their families and communities. It is designed to improve outcomes for children in need. The information gathered in the course of working with children and their families must be recorded by social services. These records have traditionally been paper-based but increasingly councils have electronic record-keeping systems in place. As part of implementing the integrated children's system, social service records kept on their work with children in need will all be kept electronically, replacing paper-based systems. The ICS is simply a better way to maintain and meet existing record-keeping requirements and, therefore, requires no legislative provision.
	The ICS will provide a more effective way of keeping and accessing records relating to social services work with chidren and families than exists at present. This will help to improve standards of service to children and families.
	The information database(s) provided for by the Children Bill will not contain detailed case information such as this. The information sharing databases will be broader in their coverage than the ICS (they will cover all children in England, whereas the ICS will record information about the 4 per cent of children in need known to social services at any one time), but narrower in terms of the information they will hold about the child. They will contain basic information about all children and the contact details of practitioners working with them across the board. This will be a new and valuable tool in aiding a wide range of practitioners in working together to meet children's needs.
	There is no explicit relationship between the IT system which supports the use of the ICS and the information databases. The IT system which CSSRs purchase for the ICS are designed to hold information about children in need and their families, who are in receipt of services from social services. It is, therefore, a specialist system for holding case-based data.

Integrated Children's System Database

The Earl of Northesk: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	To what extent the integrated children's system database is interoperable cross-departmentally with other government databases.
	 Question number missing in Hansard, possibly truncated question.

Lord Filkin: Under the guidance published by the Government, local authorities will have discretion as to how the database supporting the integrated children's system (ICS) is designed and operates, including its capacity to exchange information electronically with other systems.
	The Government's guidance does not require councils with social services responsibilities (CSSRs) to ensure that the database(s) that they have purchased to support the ICS are interoperable with other databases, other than is implied by adherence to recommended standards for data management and interoperability. Databases which have been purchased by CSSRs with the purpose of implementing the ICS are operated locally by the ICS.
	Any electronic exchange of personal information held within an ICS must be compliant with the Data Protection and Human Rights Acts.

Human Rights and Discrimination

Lord Lester of Herne Hill: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether, before deciding not to accept the right of individual petition under the Convention for the Elimination of all Forms of Racial Discrimination and under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, they consulted the Commission for Racial Equality, the Equal Opportunities Commission, the Disability Rights Commission and the Northern Ireland Equality and Human Rights Commissions; and, if so, what representations were received from each commission.
	 Question number missing in Hansard, possibly truncated question.

Baroness Ashton of Upholland: As part of their interdepartmental review of international human rights instruments, the Government consulted the Commission for Racial Equality, the Equal Opportunities Commission, the Disability Rights Commission and the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission. They did not formally consult the Equality Commission of Northern Ireland. The Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission recommended that the United Kingdom should accept the competency of the United Nations Human Rights Committee and the United Nations Committee for the Elimination of all forms of Racial Discrimination to receive communications from individuals who believe their rights under those conventions to have been violated. There is no record that the other commissions made formal representations about individual petition to the United Nations.

Child Support Agency

Lord Northbourne: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What was the cost of collection per £1 collected by the Child Support Agency in the year to March 2004.
	 Question number missing in Hansard, possibly truncated question.

Baroness Hollis of Heigham: During the 2003–04 financial year, for those clients using the agency collection service, the Child Support Agency received £580.270 million under child support arrangements. During the same period the agency arranged for £197.2 million of maintenance to be paid direct from one parent to the other. In the 2003–04 year the net administration costs of the agency were £322.983 million.
	The cost of collecting and arranging each £1 of maintenance was 41.5 pence.

Child Support Agency

Lord Northbourne: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many applications under the Child Support Agency's new scheme for assessing payments had been received by March; how many had been processed by that date; whether the backlog is increasing or decreasing; and at what rate.
	 Question number missing in Hansard, possibly truncated question.

Baroness Hollis of Heigham: The number of applications received under the new scheme by March 2004 was 321,522 and of this number 152,560 had been processed. The number of applications waiting to be actioned is increasing on a month-by-month basis. The rate of increase is reflected in the following table.
	
		
			  April 04 May 04 June 04 July 04 Aug 04 Sep 04 
			 Applications on 
			 hand 168,962 182,763 195,887 206,959 216,511 229,949 
			 Received 28,530 27,933 26,631 22,860 27,300 23,374 
			 Clearances 14,729 14,809 15,559 13,308 13,862 13,257 
			 Increase in 
			 month 13,801 13,124 11,072 9,552 13,438 10,177 
			 Applications 
			 carried forward 182,763 195,887 206,959 216,511 229,949 1 240,066 
		
	
	1 Figures from quarter 4 2003–04 onwards and scheme to date figures include clerical cases (new scheme cases unable to be progressed on the new system). Quarter 2 figures also incorporate some adjustments to take account of a reconciliation of clerical cases.

Disabilities: United Nations Convention

Lord Morris of Manchester: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What arrangements they have made for the involvement of disability organisations in consultations on a United Nations Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Rights and Dignity of Persons with Disabilities before discussions resume on the current draft text at the United Nations in New York in January 2004.
	 Question number missing in Hansard, possibly truncated question.

Baroness Hollis of Heigham: Consultations with disability organisations take place at a number of levels. A small informal group of UK internationally linked disability NGOs meets officials from DWP and FCO on an ad hoc basis to discuss progress and exchange views. In addition, we have established a broader consultative forum of UK disability organisations which meets on a regular basis. The latest meeting took place on 11 November.
	Since 2003 the Government have funded a UK disability NGO representative to attend meetings of the ad hoc committee as a member of the UK delegation. These arrangements will continue for future meetings during 2005. We have also contributed £30,000 to a UN voluntary fund established to enable disability NGOs from developing countries to attend the ad hoc committees.
	More general information on the progress of the convention negotiations is available to all interested parties on www.disability.gov.uk.

Regional Sports Bodies: Lottery Funding

Lord Moynihan: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will quantify the lottery funding that has been distributed by the regional sports bodies to date, with the figures broken down for each region.
	 Question number missing in Hansard, possibly truncated question.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: Regional sports boards have had responsibility for decisions on community-level lottery funding since the start of the 2004–05 financial year. Decisions made on lottery funding awards up to 31 October 2004 in each region are as follows:
	
		
			   
			  Award decisions (£) 
			 East Region 4,904,219 
			 East Midlands Region 7,219,068 
			 London Region 7,021,300 
			 North East Region 9,118,850 
			 North West Region 14,312,571 
			 South East Region 8,769,459 
			 South West Region 7,613,193 
			 West Midlands Region 6,612,049 
			 Yorkshire Region 6,636,470 
			 Total 72,207,179

Regional Sports Bodies: Lottery Funding

Lord Moynihan: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What percentage of Sport England grant-in-aid and sports lottery funding will be delivered through each of the regional sports boards and the regional offices of Sport England.
	 Question number missing in Hansard, possibly truncated question.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: In 2004–05, of Sport England's total lottery funding of £160 million, 73 per cent (approximately £117 million) will be delivered through its regional sports boards. Of Sport England's total Exchequer funding of £73 million, 23 per cent will be delivered through its regional sports boards (approximately £17 million). These figures include the administrative costs associated with the regional offices. The funding is distributed between the regional sports boards as follows:
	
		
			  Funding to nearest £ million 
			 East 10 
			 East Midlands 16 
			 London 14 
			 North East 13 
			 North West 28 
			 South East 16 
			 South West 11 
			 West Midlands 14 
			 Yorkshire 10 
			 Total 132

Russia: British and European Investment

Lord Harrison: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What role they believe the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development has played in fostering a sound business and investment climate in Russia for British and European firms.
	 Question number missing in Hansard, possibly truncated question.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: The Government believe that the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) has played a creditable role in fostering a suitable business and investment climate for all firms within its overall mission of supporting the transition towards open market-oriented economies and promoting private and entrepreneurial initiative. To this end, the EBRD has been active in Russia since 1991 and has signed 183 projects in Russia, worth 5.5 billion.
	The bank has also supported the strengthening of the business climate through its policy dialogue, working with the Russian Government to promote restructuring in infrastructure; to attract strategic investors in the corporate sector; to strengthen small business development and to enhance competition and support financial sector reform.
	The Government look forward to the EBRD continuing to work with the Russian Government on these issues in the context of its forthcoming strategy for the Russian Federation, 2005–07, which is currently under consideration.

Gambling Bill

Lord Moynihan: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord McIntosh of Haringey on 26 October (WA 118), what measures they intend to take to meet the shortfall of lottery money to sport, given the prediction in paragraph 5.11 of A Safe Bet for Success (Cm 5397) that future income generation by the National Lottery for good causes could be reduced by £70 million per annum.
	 Question number missing in Hansard, possibly truncated question.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: None, but the effect was estimated as from zero to £70 million. The good causes would all be affected equally by any impact on sales. Over the past year, since A Safe Bet for Success was published, lottery sales have grown well.

Olympic Games 2012: London Bid

Lord Moynihan: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the statement by the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport on 1 November (HC Deb, col. 9) that the Mayor of London had specified that the level of council tax that Londoners will pay towards the 2012 London Olympic Games is 38p a week, whether, irrespective of cost overruns, this figure will remain the maximum amount charged to Londoners in all circumstances; and over how many years the levy will be made.
	 Question number missing in Hansard, possibly truncated question.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: I have nothing to add to the statement made by my right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, nor to the response I gave to the noble Lord on 26 October 2004 (Official Report, col. WA 117).

Olympic Games 2012: London Bid

Lord Moynihan: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether in the London 2012 bid candidate file all-party support for the proposed financing package is stated as agreed.
	 Question number missing in Hansard, possibly truncated question.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: The London 2012 bid candidate file contains no such statement, nor is one required by the International Olympic Committee. General statements of support have been included from the leaders of each of the main political parties.

Olympic Games 2012: London Bid

Lord Moynihan: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What is the total land area that will need to be purchased by the London Development Agency if London is successful in its bid to host the 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games; and what is the estimated cost of this land.
	 Question number missing in Hansard, possibly truncated question.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: The London Development Agency estimates that a total of 439 acres of land will be required in connection with the area covered by the Olympic planning applications, for which outline planning permission was recently granted, at an estimated cost of £458 million.

Football Pools

Lord Moynihan: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	By how much the introduction of the National Lottery has impacted on the football pools industry; and how much income was generated by the football pools in the three years before the introduction of the National Lottery and in each of the first seven years after its introduction.
	 Question number missing in Hansard, possibly truncated question.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: The Government have not formally investigated the impact of the introduction of the National Lottery on the football pools industry.
	The Governent do not collect data on income generated by the football pools industry. However, Her Majesty's Customs and Excise estimate the amount staked on pools betting. The estimates for the period since 1990–91 to the present are:
	1990–91: £756.1 million
	1991–92: £837.3 million
	1992–93: £848.1 million
	1993–94: £916.0 million
	1994–95: £894.2 million
	1995–96: £597.7 million
	1997–98: £462.3 million
	1998–99: £348.3 million
	1999–2000 £202.0 million
	2000–01: £174.2 million
	2001–02: £144.2 million
	2002–03: £120.5 million
	2003–04: £111.9 million

Sport England: Funding

Lord Moynihan: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many United Kingdom sports governing bodies have received firm funding commitments for the next financial year for their world class start and potential programmes from Sport England.
	 Question number missing in Hansard, possibly truncated question.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: To date, Sport England has not provided funding commitments to any UK sports governing bodies for their world class start and potential programmes, for the next financial year. Funding decisions are expected to be confirmed to the governing bodies early in the new year.

Biosafety: Cartagena Protocol

Lord Hylton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Which states, in addition, to the UK, have so far ratified the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety; and whether they know of ratifications by other states which are pending.
	 Question number missing in Hansard, possibly truncated question.

Lord Whitty: 107 states, in addition to the UK and not counting the European Community, have become parties to the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety, through ratification or equivalent instruments such as acceptance, accession or approval.
	There are 29 states that have signed the protocol but have not yet become parties to it.
	For more details please see the table of signatories and ratifications on the Convention on Biological Diversity website at www.biodiv.org/biosafety/signinglist.aspx?sts=rtf&ord=dt. Please note this table is regularly updated, but the information above is correct as of 25 October 2004.

London Markets

Baroness Byford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Whitty on 9 February (WA 138), what progress has been made by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and the Corporation of London on the future of the four City of London markets at Billingsgate, Covent Garden, Smithfield and Spitalfields.
	 Question number missing in Hansard, possibly truncated question.

Lord Whitty: As I said in my reply of 9 February (col. WA 138), the future of Billingsgate, Smithfield and Spitalfields markets is a matter for the Corporation of London. It remains government policy to withdraw from involvement in the operation of New Covent Garden Market, while ensuring the market operation remains. The department is working towards that end. We remain in touch with the Corporation of London and other interested parties on this issue.

Badgers

Lord Hylton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether, since badgers have no natural predators, they will authorise culling in areas where (a) the badger population is rapidly increasing; or (b) there have been recent outbreaks of bovine tuberculosis.
	 Question number missing in Hansard, possibly truncated question.

Lord Whitty: (a) We have no plans to authorise the culling of badgers in areas where the badger population is rapidly increasing.
	(b) The only badger culling authorised in respect of bovine TB is that carried out as part of the randomised badger culling trial (RBCT). There are no plans to issue licences to cull outside RBCT areas while the research is ongoing.

Carbon Dioxide Emissions:Transport of Goods

Lord Dixon-Smith: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether the import of goods, including food, enables the transfer of a part of the United Kingdom's national consumption of goods and services producing carbon dioxide to the economies of other countries; and
	What effect the import of goods, including food, by the United Kingdom had on emissions of carbon dioxide from all sources, including emissions occuring from production and transportation, in each of the years 2001, 2002 and 2003; and
	Whether they can provide data on the effect which the import of goods, including food, had on total global emissions, including emissions occurring from production and transportation, of carbon dioxide in each of the years 2001, 2002 and 2003.
	 Question number missing in Hansard, possibly truncated question.

Lord Whitty: Under internationally agreed guidelines, carbon dioxide emissions associated with the production of goods are reported in the greenhouse gas inventory of the country in which the goods are produced. For the UK also to report these emissions would be double counting. There is therefore no transfer of emissions to or from the UK when goods are imported or exported.
	The Government have not estimated the impact of importation or exportation of goods separately from the national emissions by state, or global emissions in total.

Carbon Dioxide Emissions:Transport of Goods

Lord Dixon-Smith: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What proportion of United Kingdom imported goods, including food, come from countries not subject to emissions targets under the Kyoto protocol.
	 Question number missing in Hansard, possibly truncated question.

Lord Whitty: In 2003, the latest year for which data are available, 33.9 per cent of total United Kingdom imports of goods, including food, came from countries not subject to emissions targets under the Kyoto protocol. This percentage includes the 10 per cent of total UK imports from the United States of America, the 1 per cent from Russia and the 0.8 per cent from Australia.

Defra: Consultants and Professional Advisers

Baroness Byford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Whitty on 23 February (WA 37), whether the compiling of a central list of consultants and professional advisers has been completed; and how many consultants and professional advisers have been employed since 23 February.
	 Question number missing in Hansard, possibly truncated question.

Lord Whitty: The department has implemented an e-contracts database as part of its e-procurement strategy. That database has been live and available for use since 1 April 2004. The database is being rolled out across Defra and all contracts entered into by Defra will be recorded on it from the end of March 2005.
	Consultancy expenditure is part of the department's expenditure on professional services. As part of its preparations and implementation of the Gershon value for money agenda in Defra, Pareto analysis of departmental expenditure on professional services is being undertaken currently, and will be complete later this year.
	Once Ministers and senior officials have considered this analysis. I will let the noble Baroness have a copy of the analysis as early as possible in the New Year.

Defra: Consultants and Professional Advisers

Baroness Byford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Whitty on 23 February (WA 37), whether the absence of a central record of consultants employed by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs represents adequate ministerial control; and how the department sets a budget in the absence of such information.
	 Question number missing in Hansard, possibly truncated question.

Lord Whitty: All public procurement on goods, services and works is subject to the requirements of government accounting; the treaty; the public procurement rules and the standards of numerous chartered professional bodies. The expenditure is subject to audit at several levels within and external to the department including Parliament itself.
	The implementation of an e-contracts database by Defra will contribute further to existing measures and mechanisms of financial control and budgeting discipline and enable the department to address fully the Gershon value for money agenda with regard to departmental expenditure on professional services.
	Financial budgeting within Defra allows provision for budget holders in budget bids to define and cost the use of professional services as one means of developing and delivering customer and service requirements.

Defra: Consultants and Professional Advisers

Baroness Byford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Whitty on 23 February (WA 37), whether the use of consultants by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs is subject to external audit; and, if so, whether information given to auditors is available to Ministers.
	 Question number missing in Hansard, possibly truncated question.

Lord Whitty: All public expenditure on goods, services and works are subject to audit by departmental auditors, the National Audit Office, the European Commission's auditors and various other government and public bodies having regulatory and investigative functions connected with the probity and propriety of public expenditure.
	Information given to auditors would be available to Ministers if required subject to consideration by Defra's Audit and Risk Committee, which is chaired by the Permanent Secretary as Defra's accounting officer.

Defra: Consultants and Professional Advisers

Baroness Byford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Whitty on 23 February (WA 37), what are (a) the maximum rate per day paid to consultants and advisers within the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs; (b) the average rate per day paid to those consultants and advisers; and (c) the average rate per day paid to civil servants employed by the department.
	 Question number missing in Hansard, possibly truncated question.

Lord Whitty: The average rate per day paid to civil servants employed by the department is £75 per day if the average salary is divided by 365 days. The rate is £105 if the average salary is divided by the number of working days (including leave and public holidays for which civil servants are paid). These figures refer to permanent staff in core Defra only.
	The maximum rate and average rate per day paid for externally provided professional services within the department are being calculated currently as part of a detailed analysis of expenditure on professional services, of which consultancy is a part. I will place the information in the Library of the House in due course.
	Comparing rates for externally provided professional services with rates per day paid to civil servants is misleading as the professional services rates include a variety of overheads and the need to make a commercial return. Overheads in respect of directly employed staff are shown under other budget headings.

Seals

Lord Fearn: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What protection is given to seals found in waters bordering the coastlines of England and Wales.
	 Question number missing in Hansard, possibly truncated question.

Lord Whitty: Seals are protected in England and Wales by the Conservation of Seals Act 1970.
	Close Seasons
	Under the 1970 Act it is an offence to take or kill seals out of season. The close seasons for seals are: grey seals Halichoerus grypus, 1 September to 31 December; common or harbour seals Phoca Vituline 1 June to 31 August.
	The Act also allows the Secretary of State, if it appears necessary for the proper conservation of seals, to prohibit by way of an order the killing, injuring or taking of either or both the above seal species in any area specified in the order. There is currently such an order (The Conservation of Seals (England) Order 1999) protecting common and grey seals on the east coast of England in order to allow the numbers to recover from the phocine distemper virus (PDV) outbreaks of 1988 and 2002 which decimated the common seal population on the east coast of England.
	Fishermen are permitted to kill any seal during the close season or in an area where there is a killing or taking prohibition as prescribed in an order, to prevent it causing damage to their fishing tackle or net or to fish in their net, provided the seal is in the vicinity of said equipment at that time.
	Prohibited Methods of Killing or Taking
	The Act also prohibits the use for killing or taking any seal of any poisonous substance or any firearm other than a rifle using ammunition having a muzzle energy not less than 600 footpounds and a bullet weighing not less than 45 grains.
	Further Protection
	In addition, Regulation 41(3) of the Conservation (Natural Habitats, &c.) Regulations 1994 (S.I. 1994 No. 2716) prohibits certain other methods of killing or taking of certain seal species listed on schedule 3 of the regulations, including common or grey seals. These include electrical devices capable of killing or stunning, explosives, and nets or traps if non-selective according to their principle or conditions of use. Regulation 41(5) of the above regulations also prohibits the use of certain modes of transport to kill or take common or grey seals, namely; aircraft or moving motor vehicles.
	The Wild Mammals (Protection) Act 1996 protects wild mammals from persons carrying out specified cruel acts with intent to inflict unnecessary suffering.
	Licences to Kill or Take
	The Secretary of state has the power under Section 10(1) of the 1970 Act to issue licences to any person to take or kill seals, within the close season for various purposes, including: scientific, educational or for the prevention of damage to fisheries.

Ribble Estuary

Lord Fearn: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What plans they have to enhance environmentally the Ribble estuary in north-west England.
	 Question number missing in Hansard, possibly truncated question.

Lord Whitty: RSPB, English Nature, Environment Agency and local authorities in the north-west are promoting a Ribble estuary regional park to examine the long-term viability of environmental enhancement throughout the estuary. This includes improving defences, creating habitat areas, establishing visitor centres and improving recreation.
	The Environment Agency has also undertaken a managed realignment study of the estuary to examine the suitability of a number of sites for potential managed realignment.
	The Ribble estuary falls within the Ribble pilot river basin, the UK's pilot for implementation of the Water Framework Directive. This directive requires a strategic, river basin-based approach to managing water bodies and improving their ecological and chemical status. As part of the pilot the Environment Agency will be working closely with stakeholders, to develop a prototype river basin management plan for the Ribble basin, including the Ribble estuary.

Energy Consumption: White Goods

Baroness Miller of Chilthorne Domer: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether, since the energy consumption labelling of white goods, they have introduced any other mechanisms to ensure that consumers can easily identify those products which cause the least environmental damage.
	 Question number missing in Hansard, possibly truncated question.

Lord Whitty: The Government support a wide range of approaches to help consumers to identify products which deliver better environmental performance. Taking the example of white goods, the development of the mandatory EU energy label has advanced considerably since the first cold products were labelled in the mid-1990s, and that labelling regime is now an important driver for product improvement and consumer choice. Other good labelling regimes that apply to these products, on a voluntary basis, are the EU ecolabel and the Energy Saving Trust's "Energy Efficiency Recommended". The Government promote awareness of reliable information schemes through the Defra website, an electronic newsletter "Pitching Green", and a pocket-sized "Shopper's Guide to Green Labels". They also offer a "Directory of Green Labels" as a reference guide to existing and forthcoming labelling initiatives. At a more detailed level, information about green product standards and benchmarks is available on the market transformation programme website (www.mtprog.com), along with searchable databases showing the relative performance of different products for some categories of goods.

Flower Mark

Baroness Miller of Chilthorne Domer: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What support they have given to the European Union flower mark eco-labelling scheme over the last three years either financially or in Civil Service support.
	 Question number missing in Hansard, possibly truncated question.

Lord Whitty: Over the last three years the department has been actively supporting the EU ecolabel scheme (the flower mark) in a number of related ways, which involve administration and promotion of the scheme in the UK and the development of strategy and technical content for the scheme at EU level. In terms of staff support, Defra acts as the UK's competent body for the scheme and its officials are therefore responsible for administering the scheme in the UK and for representing the UK in EU meetings about the scheme. Officials are supported by specialist contractors who advise on technical and scientific aspects of the scheme. Other financial commitments include work on the development of new product criteria and the promotion of the scheme through a range of media. At the EU level the UK plays an active part in supporting and advancing the scheme, for example in leading the development process for several product groups and in chairing the policy committee which is looking at options for the future of the scheme and its contribution to other product-related policies.

Firearms Act: Public Places

Lord Marlesford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether access land, as defined in the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000, constitutes a public place for the purposes of the Firearms Act 1968.
	 Question number missing in Hansard, possibly truncated question.

Lord Whitty: The Government believe that land to which the public has a right of access under Section 2(1) of the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 will generally fall within the meaning of a public place contained in other primary legislation, including the Firearms Act 1968. Section 42 of the CRoW Act gives the Government power to make regulations to disregard the right of access to access land in considering whether such land is a public place for the purposes of existing legislation. Following public consultation, the Government have decided not to make such regulations but to keep the matter under review.
	The public place provisions in the Firearms Act 1986 are designed to ensure that firearms are used responsibly and safely in public places. The Act makes it an offence for a person to have a firearm in a public place unless he has lawful authority or a reasonable excuse for doing so. This should not affect a landowner's or occupier's ability to use a firearm for a legitimate purpose on his own land. As the Firearms Act already allows firearms to be used for legitimate activities, like organised shoots and pest control, the Government do not anticipate that it will lead to increased burdens for landowners or occupiers engaged in such activities on access land. Defra has issued guidance on legislation that affects public places, including guidance to police authorities on the Firearms Act 1968. This can be found on the Defra website at: defra.gov.uk/wildlife-countryside/cl/accessopen/accessopen08.htm.

Radiation

Baroness Miller of Chilthorne Domer: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What changes to the existing regulatory regime they plan to make as a result of the recent report of the Committee Examining Radiation Risks of Internal Emitters.
	 Question number missing in Hansard, possibly truncated question.

Lord Whitty: Ministers received copies of the Committee Examining Radiation Risks of Internal Emitters' final report on 20 October, along with advice on it from the Committee on Medical Aspects of Radiation in the Environment, whose report was also published on 20 October. These are complex reports on important technical issues, which we are currently considering in conjunction with colleagues in the Department of Health, the National Radiological Protection Board and the Environment Agency to ensure that the points made by CERRIE are fully taken into account in future assessments of radiation risks from internal emitters

Bovine Tuberculosis

Lord Marlesford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How much of the £81 million paid out between April 2001 and March 2004 as compensation to farmers whose cattle had been infected with tuberculosis would have been saved by a cull of badgers; and whether they will review the economic case for culling badgers which are thought to be infected with tuberculosis.
	 Question number missing in Hansard, possibly truncated question.

Lord Whitty: The effect of culling badgers on the incidence of TB in cattle herds has yet to be established. The randomised badger culling trial (RBCT), which was designed to provide information about whether badger culling is effective in reducing TB in cattle, is ongoing. It is not possible, therefore, to estimate what effect badger culling would have had on compensation expenditure between April 2001 and March 2004.
	Earlier this year we sought views on badger culling and badger management as part of our consultation on the review of the long-term TB strategy. We are now working with a small stakeholder group to anlayse the responses received and to develop a strategy for publication early in 2005. Consideration of possible future policy options, including policies involving wildlife management, will include a cost benefit analysis.

Civil Service: Women and Ethnic Minorities

Lord Ouseley: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether posts identified for workforce reductions in the Civil Service are disproportionately held by women, black and ethnic minority employees.
	 Question number missing in Hansard, possibly truncated question.

Lord Bassam of Brighton: Departments are, in general, at an early stage of developing specific plans for workforce reductions. It is for departments to determine the selection of posts which could be reduced, having regard to the need to maintain an appropriate balance of skills and expertise to meet their ongoing requirements. Cabinet Office guidance to departments made clear that they need to ensure that their procedures do not result in unlawful discrimination directly or indirectly and to consider the impact of their plans on the diversity of the workforce, so that specific groups of staff are not disproportionately disadvantaged. In particular, departments must consider the need to conduct a race equality impact assessment.

Civil Service: Women and Ethnic Minorities

Lord Ouseley: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether the overall target of 4 per cent black and ethnic minority staff to be in Senior Civil Service posts by 2008 will do no more than maintain the status quo.
	 Question number missing in Hansard, possibly truncated question.

Lord Bassam of Brighton: The 2008 target in fact requires that we increase the number of minority ethnic staff in the Senior Civil Service by almost two-thirds in the next four years. The PSA target also includes the commitment that, in the longer term, the Civil Service reflects the diversity of the population.
	The 2008 disability and ethnicity targets will be measured on a slightly different basis from the current targets for 2006; the 2008 targets focus more narrowly on around 3,900 mainstream posts in the Senior Civil Service itself, while the targets for 2005 include all posts at SCS level, encompassing around 500 additional posts, including a number of Diplomatic Service posts and some specialist/professional roles. This change will focus our efforts on maintstream SCS roles and will mean that the ethnicity and disability targets will be measured on a consistent basis with the gender targets (which are currently based on data on the SCS alone). The baseline figure for minority ethnic staff in the SCS against which the target was set is 2.4 per cent (October 2003), compared to the October 2003 SCS level figure of 3.2 per cent.

Information Sharing

The Earl of Northesk: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What are the implications for current proposals for databases of the comments of the Government's Chief Information Officer and head of e-Government Unit that, in respect of information-sharing across and within branches of government: "It is technologically impossible and is not today's big worry. Plans for how we share information are in the early days."
	 Question number missing in Hansard, possibly truncated question.

Lord Bassam of Brighton: The head of e-Government Unit was responding to a question on the production of a single database to hold all government information about all individuals. It is true to say that current technology would be unable to manage such a comprehensive database.
	Information sharing across government already takes place within the framework of applicable law. It will continue to be developed where there is benefit in doing so.